Limitations of OPS Discussion

[User Name]

Tango et al authored the "The Book" If Rob Neyer calls them sabermetricians whom am I to disagree. I suggest you may want to more research and know what you are talking about before you post, telling other people to stop. I could go on but what's the point.

 

By the way, Tango's main two disagreement with OPS+ stem from two issues: 1) The difficulty of calculation. 2) Scaling issues which don't allow the stat to present the results on a "direct" basis. For instance, if a player is 50% better than league average, his OPS+ would not be 150%, but rather 200%.

 

You may want to practice what you preach.

[Laser Show]

By the way, Tango's main two disagreement with OPS+ stem from two issues: 1) The difficulty of calculation. 2) Scaling issues which don't allow the stat to present the results on a "direct" basis. For instance, if a player is 50% better than league average, his OPS+ would not be 150%, but rather 200%.

 

You may want to practice what you preach.

 

It almost seems as though they don't like it because it is complicated and harder to present to the masses.

[iortiz]

Crawford started playing for the Rays when he was 20. 20 years old. You're arguing that we shouldn't have signed Carl Crawford because his stats are manipulated by numbers that he put up when most players are in A ball??

 

Come on man. Be real. In the two years preceding his deal, which encompasses over 1,300 plate appearances, he put up a .306 Average, an .834 OPS while averaging 54 SB, 17 HR, 30 Doubles, 10 Triples, 80 RBI, and 103 Runs.

 

People who dog on the Carl Crawford signing either 1. Are lying hypocrites who loved it when it happened and hate it now, or 2. Overvalue Crawfords OPS when he was 20 and undervalue his OPS in the 2 years before coming here.

 

EDIT: I'm not saying we didn't overpay for him, because we did, but he was (and still is, in my mind) a player worth overpaying. He brings way more than just power to the table.

 

 

Wowowowo you should read the whole story and my posts about CC before emit a conclusive opinion about my opinion.

 

And yes, we overpaid him, no matter how you want to split his numbers or what still on your mind.

 

He doesn't worth 142 M. Before/after Boston era, period.

[iortiz]

Whether or not he is' date=' you can't take one groups thoughts and ideas on a subject as gospel and completely disregard others, some of whom are more qualified and knowledgeable in the subject.[/quote']

 

True.

[FredLynn]

I answered the question there is no best measure IMO The sabermetricians opine linear wieghts for hitting but in the final analysis for the reasons as I have articulated in other threads I believe there is no one measure. Go read Tango' book and log on to his blog and read his opinion for yourself. It is an excellent wbsite for those love that approach to baseball.

 

No, there is no "one measure" that tells it all. Look at Drew and how he did with his OPS while he was here: pretty well, but not many people are satisfied with his overall performance here. Still, if there were a single best stat to look at the value of an offensive player, for me, its OPS, and for pitchers, its ERA. Those two stats might only tell half of the story for the player, so other statistics must also be considered. Some of the nonsense out there is just ludicrous: BABIP being one useless statistic that measures simple blind luck. Its amazing to me that some people want to make this relatively simple game something far more complicated than it really is.

[Elktonnick]

By the way, Tango's main two disagreement with OPS+ stem from two issues: 1) The difficulty of calculation. 2) Scaling issues which don't allow the stat to present the results on a "direct" basis. For instance, if a player is 50% better than league average, his OPS+ would not be 150%, but rather 200%.

 

You may want to practice what you preach.

 

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

 

Yea, I know what their disagreements are. I gave a quick summation.

Nevertheless they THE sabermatreicans have other disagreemtns with OP+

 

Here is just one of his posts to illustraate:

"mcsnide: the choice is not OPS+ or wOBA. The choice is OPS+ or RC+.

 

RC+ is better. There’s no debate here.

 

In either case, no reader is going to calculate it, relying on B-R.com or Fangraphs to calculate for them anyway.

 

So, again, why does OPS+ exist? "

 

This was part of a long discussion over several weeks about various metrics.

 

I cite to illustrate that I have researched the subject before I posted. If you had ( researched) your haste to have a gotcha moment wouldn't have failed as it had.

You made an intemperate remark with the clear inference that Tango et al weren't sabermetricians. and I was somehow wrong for stating that they were. You were clearly wrong to do so.

You now appear to admit that error by citing the above. I already said as much in an earlier post when I said OP+ is okay for the average fan. I was well aware of their objections all of them because I had taken the time to read their entire thread.

 

I practice what I preach when I post. No insult intended but you tend to be sloppy and leap before you look. And don't be so quick to call someone out next time. It isn't nice!

[User Name]

RC+ also has its detractors, just like OPS+. Detractors say it's not as good for the adjustment of park and league factors .

 

Should i go ahead and bring up the ideas of one group of detractors and present them as gospel? Because that's the point. Every stat has its limitations, but the more noise a stat eliminates the better.

[Elktonnick]

RC+ also has its detractors, just like OPS+. Detractors say it's not as good for the adjustment of park and league factors .

 

Should i go ahead and bring up the ideas of one group of detractors and present them as gospel? Because that's the point. Every stat has its limitations, but the more noise a stat eliminates the better.

 

Actually the point of this thread was an objective discussion of OPS its limitations and its advantages. I had hoped for an objective unemotional discussion and possible exposure to other possible data sets and metrics that can improve our collective knowldge how best to evaluate players and their performance. I submit that there should be a buffet to choose from. Some are obviously more complex than others, hence easier to use. Some require data that is difficult to obtain.

 

As has been said the perfect is the enemy of the good. Since none of us here are professionally paid for this analysis ( I assume that is case and could be wrong) it is a hobby and should be taken as such.

 

In the end some may prefer one metric over another or none at all. Just as some may say the Red Sox had a disasterous season, others mediocre and others above average. All three are correct depending on ones perspective.

 

I want to read others opinion. I may actually learn something.

[SoxSport]

 

In context, in about 90% of the situations, it's better to not make an out than to trade an out for a run.

 

A good manager will pick the right "10%" situations, or whatever the percent is.

[User Name]

A good manager will pick the right "10%" situations' date=' or whatever the percent is.[/quote']

 

That's part of the difference between a good manager and Terry Francona.